Chris Morillo (partner is Sonya K.

)
Mrs. Moore
Speech and Debate Period 1
7 March 2014
PRO Argument
There are so many conflicting opinions in education today that
education is constantly being divided by people on either side of these
arguments. One of the newer arguments on the issue of education is
single-gender classrooms. On todays resolution, which states that:
Single-gender classrooms would improve the quality of education in
American public schools, my partner, Sonya Kalara, and I, Chris
Morillo, firmly stand on the affirmation.
First, I would like to define multiple key terms.
-Single-sex education, or single-gender education, is defined as the
practice of educating girls and boys in separate classes or schools. Of
course we recognize that gender and sex are not equivalent. We are
simply using the standard terms of education.
-I would also like to define what improved quality of education would
be. According to the US Department of Education, a high quality plan
for education is one that creates specific plans for specific groups and
meets the needs of all learners. While we acknowledge that all people
are diverse and learn differently, single-gender classrooms remove one

of the variables (gender differences) that affect learning in coed

classrooms.
For my first contention, I would like to stress that girls and boys
have very different mindsets, which means they learn differently and
should have separate learning processes in school. The NASSPE states
that girls and boys have been proven to learn differently in all-age
groups, all subjects, and all across the globe. Some examples of these
differences include boys needing kinesthetic stimulation in math
classrooms versus girls who need real-world application. If we want
students to succeed we must cater to each genders unique learning
process. Also, the Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development says, Seeing through the lens of gender in the
classroom can help teachers reconsider or examine their current
practices and that schools ought to consider offering single-gender
classrooms as one highly effective change that can address students
needs. By separating genders in classrooms, teachers are able to
focus on specific issues of the classroom (and its gender) and
techniques to overcome the problems. Success in single-gender
classrooms has been proven by a study by the University of
Pennsylvania which showed that girls attending girls schools and boys
attending boys schools were significantly more likely to attend a 4year college compared with girls and boys attending coed schools.

My second contention is that there would be less distraction in

single-gender classrooms. According to the ASCD, there is increased
student engagement in single-gender classrooms with regards to
self-confidence, motivation, participation, and desire to complete hard
work. In these classrooms, students are able to focus on academics,
which is what is important in the classroom. The GlobalPost states
students may be less concerned about impressing the opposite sex
and more focused on instruction. This means that without multiple
genders in the classroom, students have a better chance of success. It
is no surprise that boys and girls are distracted by each other,
however, it is not just romantic distraction we are talking about. The
article also brings up the social benefits and tells us students may feel
that the social playing field is leveled with the absence of competition
for attention from the opposite sex. This means there are social and
educational benefits that come from single-gender classrooms that
cannot be ignored. If we want students to actually learn, we must
decrease their distraction during learning time and the learning
process.
Finally, my third contention is that single-gender classrooms
would break down traditional gender roles. According to an article from
the National Education Association, Leonard Sax believes We live in a
(biased) society. girls would be free to start working toward that
Nobel Prize if they studied in a more supportive, esteem-building

environment. This environment is achieved through single-gender

classrooms because instead of girls competing for attention from boys,
we have girls competing with other girls for scholastic ability. This
optimal-learning environment is so easy to achieve, and we can give
them this environment with single-gender classrooms, and truly see
our students succeed. Additionally, the GlobalPost states Single-sex
schools report that female students are less likely to consider science
or computer classes boys classes and therefore stay more
engaged. This is so because boys are not there to dominate their
traditionally controlled subjects. But its not just girls who are given
this opportunity in single-gender education; boys are also able to go
against their classic roles. This article also tell us that single-sex
language arts classes may help to dislodge stereotypical thinking that
indicates males dont perform as well as females in language arts. For
both genders, single-gender classrooms level the academic playing
field, allowing for both to try new interests and subjects. This means
both genders are able to defy mainstream roles and explore new
opportunities with single-gender classrooms.
If single-gender classrooms mean leveling the academic AND
social playing fields, how can we not implement it to provide optimal
learning for the students of the American public school system? I hope
I have made it clear that single-gender classrooms would truly help
American public schools because we know that girls and boys think

and learn differently, because there would be less distraction, and

finally because it allows both sexes to defy traditional and classic roles.
We need to spend less time being divided and more time focusing on
what improves the quality of our public schools, which we have proven
is single-gender classrooms. Thank you.

More arguments/evidence for 2nd speaker:

Legality and Cost?: According to the ASCD, Single-gender education
is a legal option for any K-12 public school, and it can be implemented
quickly at little cost.
But what about LGBT people?: The scope of this argument is too
small, because, according to UCLA Law LGBT people comprise only
3.5% of the population.
And Diversity?: Diversity can occur without multiple genders (such
as race, LGBT people, personal backgrounds).
LARRY SUMMERS: girls in technology
NASSPE: Classes can be tailored for each gender
QUESTIONS :
Do you agree that males and females learn differently?
YES: Then what is the reasoning behind educating them together?

NO: Then how do you account for the differences in gender success
according to subject?

Do you agree that traditional gender roles are encouraged in coed

classrooms?
YES: Then how can you disagree with single-gender classrooms,
which would encourage nontraditional gender roles?
NO: Do you have evidence or can you explain to me how
nontraditional roles are encouraged in coed classrooms?

Do you agree that most boys and girls are distracted by each other?
YES: Then why not implement single-gender classrooms to reduce
said distraction and wouldnt that improve the quality of education?
Does reducing distraction mean improving the quality of
education?
NO: U stupid.